Dispelling the myth of "compassion fatigue."

A Tribute to Anthony Shadid: Good Writing

Like any other aspiring journalist, I’m attracted to this line of work for idealistic reasons. I recognize the potential to connect, inspire, and positively affect readers and subjects through the power of story and image. In my grad courses at UW-Madison, we are constantly talking about the ‘human element’ that is present in good news writing – the thing that draws a reader into a story, makes it resonate with them. This may be a triumph over tragedy, the merit of working hard, the process of grieving, or the endearing innocence of a child.

Finding a way to access these raw moments is one of the great challenges of reporting, but this candid reality is the version of truth that the most creditable journalists depict. In my opinion, war reporting is a unique measure of a journalist’s ability to strike that cord of shared humanity in readers. War is laden with matters that are sensitive, taboo, desensitizing and exploitive, making the need for journalists to initiate an honest dialogue all the more important.

Anthony Shadid won the 2010 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting, for his series on Iraq as the U.S. withdrew and locals were left to struggle with the bitter legacy of war. His stories stand apart from mediocre coverage of the same topic for some notable reasons. By outlining the strengths I’ve identified in his writing, I invite other journalists to emulate his style with me as we strive to articulate stories for social change.

Setting the scene

Shadid’s writing is descriptive, without being superfluous. When he takes the time to paint a scene for readers, he does so with a definite purpose. In the case of his series on Iraq, his words take us to an unfamiliar place and into the context of a foreign culture. He understands that he must provide this cross-cultural reference for his readers, if they are to become fully invested in the predicaments that those in his articles are facing.

Portraying subjects with dignity

When looking for stories in a conflict situation, journalists are responsible for striking a fine balance between “truth telling” and “minimizing harm.” Dealing with people in vulnerable situations requires reporters to weigh the significance of telling civilian stories against the harm of exploiting their pain. Giving the marginalized a voice is one way to empower them, to give them ownership over their lives and emotions. Shadid prioritizes the human dignity of of the Iraqi civilians in his articles by mentioning their jobs, age, body language, and most importantly, by featuring their words.

Cross-cultural approach

One of the most striking aspects of Shadid’s articles is the fact that he is able to extract such powerful quotes from Iraqi civilians. Part of his success can be attributed to his fluency in Arabic. He studied Arabic as an undergrad at UW-Madison and went on to study it at the American University in Cairo. The value of language skills cannot be over stressed. Being able to communicate with someone through their own language breaks down power barriers and invites a more sincere conversation. Shadid capitalizes on this advantage by featuring quotes from those who are rarely cited in Western coverage of the Iraq War. By giving voice to those who are experiencing the conflict first-hand, he is capable of facilitating cross-cultural empathy.

Resisting nationalism

As the Baghdad bureau chief of the Washington Post, Shadid did not feed into the national script that the aftermath of the Iraq War was a clean affair. He told stories that were representative of the tragedy and destruction, even when they were uncomfortable and critical. He sought to challenge readers’ assumptions about the situation, to make them consider their role as global citizens, and not just American citizens.

Shadid’s Pulitzer Prize winning articles encompass all of the qualities that I outlined above. I recommend reading his March 12, 2009 article ‘No One Values the Victim Anymore’ and December 24, 2009 article In Thuluyah, reverberations of a U.S. raid. In the second article, he shares the story of a father who was forced to execute his son, caught in the crossroads of tribal fidelity and his sons supposed role as a U.S. military informant. These stories are so well written that they will never lose their news value.

Like this:

Related

3 Responses

Thanks for the post, Erin. Nicely done. I’d love to hang out with Shadid sometime and just pick his brain about all the things he’s seen. I bet he’s got some amazing behind-the-scenes stories to tell.

I often wonder what’s it like to be a war correspondent. I can’t imagine what it would be like to keep my composure or even attempt to stay neutral and observant when my own physical well-being was in jeopardy. I read this great article in the NY Times about Shadid and three other journalists who were taken captive in Libya. I remember thinking, man, I’m as idealistic as any other journalist, but if I was being stripped and beaten as a hostage, I’d probably wonder if any story was worth it at that point. It’s one thing to say it’s worth it if you live…but if you don’t? Still, in my opinion Shadid and the other journalists are badasses for having gone through that kind of trauma and showing up to write another story.

I agree with your tribute, and I too send my respect Shadid’s way. You hear that Anthony? Come back here and talk to us about writing already!

Shadid is a UW grad…maybe we can use that pull to get him to come back as a guest speaker.

I think your deliberations on war correspondence further highlight the value of the stories that journalists like Shaded bring back from conflict zones. I’d like to think that I could measure up to the task, myself, one day. Maybe not on the front-line, but certainly in the wake of violence, when so many voices desperately deserve to be heard.